Clear rules for cleaner waters

The Obama administration’s issuance this week of the Clean Water Rule to restore safeguards under the 1972 Clean Water Act will help keep our waters clean — from stream to sea and in between — but should also clarify muddied regulatory waters for farmers and other property owners.

Decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2001 and 2006 left about 60 percent of the nation’s streams and millions of acres of wetlands without clear rules or regulation under the Clean Water Act’s intended protections. The legal limbo left landowners, particularly farmers, without clear direction of what was expected of them. And a New York Times story found the lack of enforceable rules led the federal Environmental Protection Agency to drop more than 1,500 investigations against polluters in just the first four years after the court’s 2006 decision.

In announcing the rule, President Obama noted that 1 in 3 Americans get their drinking water from streams that lacked clear rules for protection. At a statewide level, the rules will now cover 54 percent of Washington state’s streams that had been left without adequate protections. Bruce Speight, executive director for WashPIRG, a public interest research group, called the new rules “the biggest victory for clean water in a decade,” particularly for the health of Puget Sound, which depends on clean water from the streams and rivers that feed it.

Even before details of the new rules were released this week, the Republican-led U.S. House voted to block the rules, calling them vague, an overreach of executive authority and done with the intention to expand the Clean Water Act’s jurisdiction. The Senate is expected to follow along the same line later this summer.

None of that is the case. The rules themselves have now clarified what is covered by regulation. Nor is the rule-making authority of presidents and their agencies anything new. And while the regulations now cover smaller bodies of water such as streams and wetlands, the Clean Water Act, signed into law by President Nixon, still is not restored to the full regulatory authority that was set out in 1972.

The EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which proposed the rule jointly, went to great lengths in recent months to explain the regulations and take comment from those potentially effected. Groups representing industries and farmers, including the American Farm Bureau Federation, have challenged the rule, fearing it will burden landowners with environmental assessments and permitting.

But another agricultural organization, the National Farmers Union, which represents farmers in 33 states, including Washington, provided a more measured and less alarmist response. While it expressed concern that regulations might be extended to bodies of water that wouldn’t effect water quality, it praised the EPA for its outreach and said the result were rules that offered farmers clarity about what streams and ditches were covered and limited the risk for unnecessary enforcement and litigation.

Clearer rules help keep the waters cleaner.

Talk to us

> Give us your news tips.

> Send us a letter to the editor.

> More Herald contact information.

More in Opinion

toon
Editorial cartoons for Thursday, July 10

A sketchy look at the news of the day.… Continue reading

2024 Presidential Election Day Symbolic Elements.
Editorial: Retain Escamilla, Binda on Lynnwood City Council

Escamilla was appointed a year ago. Binda is serving his first term.

Blame Democrats’ taxes, rules for out-of-state ferry contract

Gov. Bob Ferguson should be ashamed of the hypocrisy shown by choosing… Continue reading

Letter used too broad a brush against Democrats

In response to a recent letter to the editor, this Democrat admits… Continue reading

Kristof: Women’s rights effort has work to do in Africa, elsewhere

Girls in Sierra Leone will sell themselves to pay for school. The feminist movement has looked away.

French: Supreme Court hits a vile industry with its comeuppance

While disagreeing on the best test, the justices agreed on the threat that porn poses to children.

Comment: When ‘politically correct’ becomes ‘Trump approved’

Companies and reporters are seeing the consequences of using words the president doesn’t approve of.

toon
Editorial cartoons for Wednesday, July 9

A sketchy look at the news of the day.… Continue reading

A Volunteers of America Western Washington crisis counselor talks with somebody on the phone Thursday, July 28, 2022, in at the VOA Behavioral Health Crisis Call Center in Everett, Washington. (Ryan Berry / The Herald)
Editorial: Dire results will follow end of LGBTQ+ crisis line

The Trump administration will end funding for a 988 line that serves youths in the LGBTQ+ community.

Welch: A plan to supply drugs to addicts is a dangerous dance

A state panel’s plan to create a ‘safer supply’ of drugs is the wrong path to addiction recovery.

Douthat: Conservatives sacrificed own goals to pay for tax cuts

Along with its cuts to Medicaid, long-held GOP priorities were ignored in the Big Beautiful Bill.

Comment: Supreme Court porn ruling a naked change to speech rights

The majority ignored a 20-year-old ruling that overturned an age-verification law similar to the Texas law.

Support local journalism

If you value local news, make a gift now to support the trusted journalism you get in The Daily Herald. Donations processed in this system are not tax deductible.